The ability to grow will come with purposeful practice!
This not only applies to a positive outcome, it's a truth in the negative context as well. What I think and how I practice my daily routines determines my outcomes. If I choose to laze around the house and become imbedded into the sofa, the results will reflect that purposeful practice. I will grow lazy, ineffective, and a burden on others.
Should I choose to live a purpose driven life, one of significance, the results will also follow. This leads me back to a witty Tim Marks quote, "The harder I work, the luckier I get." God certainly rewards persistence. So as a routine after I wake, I do my Bible study, read my positive affirmation statement, write my blog, and face my day with specific intent aimed at a positive outcome. It's a purposeful practice bound to bring a positive outcome!
I truly think a day needs to begin with a positive affirmation statement. We all need to remind ourselves what our stated goal is, and that we are capable of achieving whatever we set our minds to accomplish. Why not first thing in the morning? What better time than the onset of a new day to review what we wish to accomplish?
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Friday, June 29, 2012
The Time Has Come!
Usually I'll let a current event stew for a few days to be sure it's all played out before I comment on it, but the Supreme Court's healthcare decision is an exception. It was an extreme disappointment to get the news that the Chief Justice, who usually leans to the conservative side, joined the liberal view of the decision. I think it's important to understand how we got to this point before we point fingers at the way one voted.
Let's face it America, the ultimate responsibility on how this nation is run lies in our hands. We as a people let ourselves down by allowing a sense of complacency to infect our voting block. We didn't do our due diligence and the people allowed to oversee our nation were not vetted properly. As a result their policies and appointments reflect views other than those embraced by the founders in all three branches of government and appointed positions. The blame for the healthcare decision is reflected in our mirror.
Perhaps now we can passionately understand the power of the vote, and how important it is to inform everyone within our circle of influence to not only vote, but to be an informed voter. What we got yesterday is the result of a failure to do that.
Secondly it is important to hold our media to a higher standard. This is the four branch of government and it is totally unacceptable for us as consumers to allow one sided propaganda to infect our electorate. It is our responsibility to bombard every media outlet with dissenting opinion every time they climb into the tank for a political party. They have to be called out! You are their customer and the media has to be reminded they are an income earning business, and you vote with your wallet. We deserve unbiased reporting, and if it's not demanded, expect more of an advertising campaign rather than fair and balanced reporting.
The citizens still run this country, it hasn't been perverted beyond that point yet. But we need to reaffirm our position of responsibility, and reassure both the elected and the media we demand a better result. There is but us to blame for the three ring circus that is now showing in Washington DC. I can insure you without our input it'll only get worse!
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Let's face it America, the ultimate responsibility on how this nation is run lies in our hands. We as a people let ourselves down by allowing a sense of complacency to infect our voting block. We didn't do our due diligence and the people allowed to oversee our nation were not vetted properly. As a result their policies and appointments reflect views other than those embraced by the founders in all three branches of government and appointed positions. The blame for the healthcare decision is reflected in our mirror.
Perhaps now we can passionately understand the power of the vote, and how important it is to inform everyone within our circle of influence to not only vote, but to be an informed voter. What we got yesterday is the result of a failure to do that.
Secondly it is important to hold our media to a higher standard. This is the four branch of government and it is totally unacceptable for us as consumers to allow one sided propaganda to infect our electorate. It is our responsibility to bombard every media outlet with dissenting opinion every time they climb into the tank for a political party. They have to be called out! You are their customer and the media has to be reminded they are an income earning business, and you vote with your wallet. We deserve unbiased reporting, and if it's not demanded, expect more of an advertising campaign rather than fair and balanced reporting.
The citizens still run this country, it hasn't been perverted beyond that point yet. But we need to reaffirm our position of responsibility, and reassure both the elected and the media we demand a better result. There is but us to blame for the three ring circus that is now showing in Washington DC. I can insure you without our input it'll only get worse!
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Liberty Or Largess?
Today is a crossroad in American history. Will the accounts reflect that the founding principles of this nation were ignored, or will the Supreme court remember the words of Ben Franklin?
" They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Honestly I can't figure out how America got to the point where it's people think it's the government's job to supply them what they are more than capable of supplying to themselves. I love the argument that health care costs are spiraling up out of control and creating more unsustainable debt for the Federal Government. To stand on that statement is absurd. What program did the Federal Government enact (and shouldn't have) that is effected by healthcare costs? Medicaid? Medicare? Social Security? Prescription drug reimbursement? I'm sorry folks but all those fall outside of the frame work of the original mission statement of the founders. If you stuck with the plan of individual liberty, and the government protecting the borders, raising an army and creating a money supply this problem would not exist! The founders knew that anything outside of the scope outlined would create problems, and it did.
All the excuses can be made for these programs to exist, but the truth is apparent, government is incapable of doing anything effectively but what I outlined above. Do we ask physicians to build roads? Nope, there is a reason for that. It's outside their scope of expertise, as is government interference in our healthcare choices. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this is true, history reflects it. All those programs are insolvent. There is no argument, social engineering is best left to charities, and government should stay within it parameters outlined in the Constitution, free of the perversion of it's premise.
Despite the best intentions to keep our Republic pure, government is run by man, and man is imperfect. Let's just pray that five of those judges understand the original mission statement of the founders when they decided the outcome of the affordable healthcare act.
God Bless!
Capt Bill
" They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Honestly I can't figure out how America got to the point where it's people think it's the government's job to supply them what they are more than capable of supplying to themselves. I love the argument that health care costs are spiraling up out of control and creating more unsustainable debt for the Federal Government. To stand on that statement is absurd. What program did the Federal Government enact (and shouldn't have) that is effected by healthcare costs? Medicaid? Medicare? Social Security? Prescription drug reimbursement? I'm sorry folks but all those fall outside of the frame work of the original mission statement of the founders. If you stuck with the plan of individual liberty, and the government protecting the borders, raising an army and creating a money supply this problem would not exist! The founders knew that anything outside of the scope outlined would create problems, and it did.
All the excuses can be made for these programs to exist, but the truth is apparent, government is incapable of doing anything effectively but what I outlined above. Do we ask physicians to build roads? Nope, there is a reason for that. It's outside their scope of expertise, as is government interference in our healthcare choices. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this is true, history reflects it. All those programs are insolvent. There is no argument, social engineering is best left to charities, and government should stay within it parameters outlined in the Constitution, free of the perversion of it's premise.
Despite the best intentions to keep our Republic pure, government is run by man, and man is imperfect. Let's just pray that five of those judges understand the original mission statement of the founders when they decided the outcome of the affordable healthcare act.
God Bless!
Capt Bill
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
A Brief Education!
It's likely that today the congress will address the student loan interest issue that is about to double for loans granted from this day forward. Despite the fact that the individuals this affects are educated in the most prestigious learning institutions this country has to offer, there are misconceptions as to how this might affect students with existing loans. Let me clear that up. It won't! You have an existing contract with the government and they cannot change the interest rates your paying for money already borrowed without your permission. This increase would affect loans granted from the day of increase forward. So I hope that relieves the hysteria created by those who wish to garner your vote by scaring you into thinking loans you already have will become most costly.
Let's examine the ruse America has fallen into involving higher learning.
Federal Student Aid and the Law of Unintended Consequences
FEDERAL STUDENT financial assistance programs are costly, inefficient, byzantine, and fail to serve their desired objectives. In a word, they are dysfunctional, among the worst of many bad federal programs
These programs are commonly rationalized on three grounds: on the grounds that assuring more young people a higher education has positive spillover effects for the country; on the grounds that higher education promotes equal economic opportunity (or, as the politicians say, that it is “a ticket to achieving the American Dream”); or on the grounds that too few students would go to college in the absence of federal loan programs, since private markets for loans to college students are defective.
All three of these arguments are dubious at best. The alleged positive spillover effects of sending more and more Americans to college are very difficult to measure. And as the late Milton Friedman suggested to me shortly before his death, they may be more than offset by negative spillover effects. Consider, for instance, the relationship between spending by state governments on higher education and their rate of economic growth. Controlling for other factors important in growth determination, the relationship between education spending and economic growth is negative or, at best, non-existent.
What about higher education being a vehicle for equal economic opportunity or income equality? Over the last four decades, a period in which the proportion of adults with four-year college degrees tripled, income equality has declined. (As a side note, I do not know the socially optimal level of economic inequality, and the tacit assumption that more such equality is always desirable is suspect; my point here is simply that, in reality, higher education today does not promote income equality.)
Finally, in regards to the argument that capital markets for student loans are defective, if financial institutions can lend to college students on credit cards and make car loans to college students in large numbers—which they do—there is no reason why they can’t also make student educational loans.
Despite the fact that the rationales for federal student financial assistance programs are very weak, these programs are growing rapidly. The Pell Grant program did much more than double in size between 2007 and 2010. Although it was designed to help poor people, it is now becoming a middle class entitlement. Student loans have been growing eight to ten percent a year for at least two decades, and, as is well publicized, now aggregate to one trillion dollars of debt outstanding—roughly $25,000 on average for the 40,000,000 holders of the debt. Astoundingly, student loan debt now exceeds credit card debt.
Nor is it correct to assume that most of this debt is held by young people in their twenties and early thirties. The median age of those with loan obligations today is around 33, and approximately 40 percent of the debt is held by people 40 years of age or older. So when politicians talk about maintaining low interest loans to help kids in college, more often than not the help is going to middle-aged individuals long gone from the halls of academia.
With this as an introduction, let me outline eight problems with federal student grant and loan programs. The list is not exclusive.
(1) Student loan interest rates are not set by the forces of supply and demand, but by the political process. Normally, interest rates are a price used to allocate scarce resources; but when that price is manipulated by politicians, it leads to distortions in the use of resources. Since student loan interest rates are always set at below-market rates, too much money is borrowed for college. Currently those interest rates are extremely low, with a key rate of 3.4 percent—which, after adjusting for inflation, is approximately zero. Moreover, both the president and Governor Romney say they want to continue that low interest rate after July 1, when it is supposed to double. This aggravates an already bad situation, and provides a perfect example of the fundamental problem facing our nation today: politicians pushing programs whose benefits are visible and immediate (even if illusory, as suggested above), while their extraordinarily high costs are less visible and more distant in time.
(2) In the real world, interest rates vary with the prospects that the borrower will repay the loan. In the surreal world of student loans, the brilliant student completing an electrical engineering degree at M.I.T. pays the same interest rate as the student majoring in ethnic studies at a state university who has a GPA below 2.0. The former student will almost certainly graduate and get a job paying $50,000 a year or more, whereas the odds are high the latter student will fail to graduate and will be lucky to make $30,000 a year.
Related to this problem, colleges themselves have no “skin in the game.” They are responsible for allowing loan commitments to occur, but they face no penalties or negative consequences when defaults are extremely high, imposing costs on taxpayers.
(3) Perhaps most importantly, federal student grant and loan programs have contributed to the tuition price explosion. When third parties pay a large part of the bill, at least temporarily, the customer’s demand for the service rises and he is not as sensitive to price as he would be if he were paying himself. Colleges and universities take advantage of that and raise their prices to capture the funds that ostensibly are designed to help students. This is what happened previously in health care, and is what is currently happening in higher education.
(4) The federal government now has a monopoly in providing student loans. Until recently, at least it farmed out the servicing of loans to a variety of private financial service firms, adding an element of competition in terms of quality of service, if not price. But the Obama administration, with its strong hostility to private enterprise, moved to establish a complete monopoly. One would think the example of the U.S. Postal Service today, losing taxpayer money hand over fist and incapable of making even the most obviously needed reforms, would be enough proof against the prudence of such a move. And remember: because of highly irresponsible fiscal policies, the federal government borrows 30 or 40 percent of the money it currently spends, much of that from overseas. Thus we are incurring long-term obligations to foreigners to finance loans to largely middle class Americans to go to college. This is not an appropriate use of public funds at a time of dangerously high federal budget deficits.
(5) Those applying for student loans or Pell Grants are compelled to complete the FAFSA form, which is extremely complex, involves more than 100 questions, and is used by colleges to administer scholarships (or, more accurately, tuition discounts). Thus colleges are given all sorts of highly personal and private information on incomes, wealth, debts, child support, and so forth. A car dealer who demanded such information so that he could see how badly he could gouge you would either be out of business or in jail within days or weeks. But it is commonplace in higher education because of federal student financial assistance programs.
(6) As federal programs have increased the number of students who enroll in college, the number of new college graduates now far exceeds the number of new managerial, technical and professional jobs—positions that college graduates have traditionally taken. A survey by Northeastern University estimates that 54 percent of recent college graduates are underemployed or unemployed. Thus we currently have 107,000 janitors and 16,000 parking lot attendants with bachelor’s degrees, not to mention bartenders, hair dressers, mail carriers, and so on. And many of those in these limited-income occupations are struggling to pay off student loan obligations.
Connected to this is the fact that more and more kids are going to college who lack the cognitive skills, the discipline, the academic preparation, or the ambition to succeed academically. They simply cannot or do not master well much of the rather complex materials that college students are expected to learn. As a result, many students either do not graduate or fail to graduate on time. I have estimated that only 40 percent or less of Pell Grant recipients get degrees within six years—an extremely high dropout or failure rate. No one has seriously questioned that statistic—a number, by the way, that the federal government does not publish, no doubt because it is embarrassingly low.
Also related is the fact that, in an attempt to minimize this problem, colleges have lowered standards, expecting students to read and write less while giving higher grades for lesser amounts of work. Surveys show that students spend on average less than 30 hours per week on academic work—less than they spend on recreation. As Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa show in their book Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, critical thinking skills among college seniors on average are little more than among freshmen.
(7) As suggested to me a couple of days ago by a North Carolina judge, based on a case in his courtroom, with so many funds so readily available there is a temptation and opportunity for persons to acquire low interest student loans with the intention of dropping out of school quickly to use the proceeds for other purposes. (In the North Carolina student loan fraud case, it was to start up a t-shirt business.)
(8) Lazy or mediocre students can get greater subsidies than hard-working and industrious ones. Take Pell Grants. A student who works extra hard and graduates with top grades after three years will receive only half as much money as a student who flunks several courses and takes six years to finish or doesn’t obtain a degree at all. In other words, for recipients of federal aid there are disincentives to excel.
* * *
If the Law of Unintended Consequences ever applied, it is in federal student financial assistance. Programs created with the noblest of intentions have failed to serve either their customers or the nation well. In the 1950s and 1960s, before these programs were large, American higher education enjoyed a Golden Age. Enrollments were rising, lower-income student access was growing, and American leadership in higher education was becoming well established. In other words, the system flourished without these programs. Subsequently, massive growth in federal spending and involvement in higher education has proved counterproductive.
With the ratio of debt to GDP rising nationally, and the federal government continuing to spend more and more taxpayer money on higher education at an unsustainable long-term pace, a re-thinking of federal student financial aid policies is a good place to start in meeting America’s economic crisis.-
Richard Vedder
Professor of Economics
Ohio University
Now everyone who has taken the time to read this post is educated in the farce the Federal Government and the institutions of higher learn are running on the college student and the citizens of this great nation. In short the quality of education has dropped and the price has gone up.
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Let's examine the ruse America has fallen into involving higher learning.
Federal Student Aid and the Law of Unintended Consequences
FEDERAL STUDENT financial assistance programs are costly, inefficient, byzantine, and fail to serve their desired objectives. In a word, they are dysfunctional, among the worst of many bad federal programs
These programs are commonly rationalized on three grounds: on the grounds that assuring more young people a higher education has positive spillover effects for the country; on the grounds that higher education promotes equal economic opportunity (or, as the politicians say, that it is “a ticket to achieving the American Dream”); or on the grounds that too few students would go to college in the absence of federal loan programs, since private markets for loans to college students are defective.
All three of these arguments are dubious at best. The alleged positive spillover effects of sending more and more Americans to college are very difficult to measure. And as the late Milton Friedman suggested to me shortly before his death, they may be more than offset by negative spillover effects. Consider, for instance, the relationship between spending by state governments on higher education and their rate of economic growth. Controlling for other factors important in growth determination, the relationship between education spending and economic growth is negative or, at best, non-existent.
What about higher education being a vehicle for equal economic opportunity or income equality? Over the last four decades, a period in which the proportion of adults with four-year college degrees tripled, income equality has declined. (As a side note, I do not know the socially optimal level of economic inequality, and the tacit assumption that more such equality is always desirable is suspect; my point here is simply that, in reality, higher education today does not promote income equality.)
Finally, in regards to the argument that capital markets for student loans are defective, if financial institutions can lend to college students on credit cards and make car loans to college students in large numbers—which they do—there is no reason why they can’t also make student educational loans.
Despite the fact that the rationales for federal student financial assistance programs are very weak, these programs are growing rapidly. The Pell Grant program did much more than double in size between 2007 and 2010. Although it was designed to help poor people, it is now becoming a middle class entitlement. Student loans have been growing eight to ten percent a year for at least two decades, and, as is well publicized, now aggregate to one trillion dollars of debt outstanding—roughly $25,000 on average for the 40,000,000 holders of the debt. Astoundingly, student loan debt now exceeds credit card debt.
Nor is it correct to assume that most of this debt is held by young people in their twenties and early thirties. The median age of those with loan obligations today is around 33, and approximately 40 percent of the debt is held by people 40 years of age or older. So when politicians talk about maintaining low interest loans to help kids in college, more often than not the help is going to middle-aged individuals long gone from the halls of academia.
With this as an introduction, let me outline eight problems with federal student grant and loan programs. The list is not exclusive.
(1) Student loan interest rates are not set by the forces of supply and demand, but by the political process. Normally, interest rates are a price used to allocate scarce resources; but when that price is manipulated by politicians, it leads to distortions in the use of resources. Since student loan interest rates are always set at below-market rates, too much money is borrowed for college. Currently those interest rates are extremely low, with a key rate of 3.4 percent—which, after adjusting for inflation, is approximately zero. Moreover, both the president and Governor Romney say they want to continue that low interest rate after July 1, when it is supposed to double. This aggravates an already bad situation, and provides a perfect example of the fundamental problem facing our nation today: politicians pushing programs whose benefits are visible and immediate (even if illusory, as suggested above), while their extraordinarily high costs are less visible and more distant in time.
(2) In the real world, interest rates vary with the prospects that the borrower will repay the loan. In the surreal world of student loans, the brilliant student completing an electrical engineering degree at M.I.T. pays the same interest rate as the student majoring in ethnic studies at a state university who has a GPA below 2.0. The former student will almost certainly graduate and get a job paying $50,000 a year or more, whereas the odds are high the latter student will fail to graduate and will be lucky to make $30,000 a year.
Related to this problem, colleges themselves have no “skin in the game.” They are responsible for allowing loan commitments to occur, but they face no penalties or negative consequences when defaults are extremely high, imposing costs on taxpayers.
(3) Perhaps most importantly, federal student grant and loan programs have contributed to the tuition price explosion. When third parties pay a large part of the bill, at least temporarily, the customer’s demand for the service rises and he is not as sensitive to price as he would be if he were paying himself. Colleges and universities take advantage of that and raise their prices to capture the funds that ostensibly are designed to help students. This is what happened previously in health care, and is what is currently happening in higher education.
(4) The federal government now has a monopoly in providing student loans. Until recently, at least it farmed out the servicing of loans to a variety of private financial service firms, adding an element of competition in terms of quality of service, if not price. But the Obama administration, with its strong hostility to private enterprise, moved to establish a complete monopoly. One would think the example of the U.S. Postal Service today, losing taxpayer money hand over fist and incapable of making even the most obviously needed reforms, would be enough proof against the prudence of such a move. And remember: because of highly irresponsible fiscal policies, the federal government borrows 30 or 40 percent of the money it currently spends, much of that from overseas. Thus we are incurring long-term obligations to foreigners to finance loans to largely middle class Americans to go to college. This is not an appropriate use of public funds at a time of dangerously high federal budget deficits.
(5) Those applying for student loans or Pell Grants are compelled to complete the FAFSA form, which is extremely complex, involves more than 100 questions, and is used by colleges to administer scholarships (or, more accurately, tuition discounts). Thus colleges are given all sorts of highly personal and private information on incomes, wealth, debts, child support, and so forth. A car dealer who demanded such information so that he could see how badly he could gouge you would either be out of business or in jail within days or weeks. But it is commonplace in higher education because of federal student financial assistance programs.
(6) As federal programs have increased the number of students who enroll in college, the number of new college graduates now far exceeds the number of new managerial, technical and professional jobs—positions that college graduates have traditionally taken. A survey by Northeastern University estimates that 54 percent of recent college graduates are underemployed or unemployed. Thus we currently have 107,000 janitors and 16,000 parking lot attendants with bachelor’s degrees, not to mention bartenders, hair dressers, mail carriers, and so on. And many of those in these limited-income occupations are struggling to pay off student loan obligations.
Connected to this is the fact that more and more kids are going to college who lack the cognitive skills, the discipline, the academic preparation, or the ambition to succeed academically. They simply cannot or do not master well much of the rather complex materials that college students are expected to learn. As a result, many students either do not graduate or fail to graduate on time. I have estimated that only 40 percent or less of Pell Grant recipients get degrees within six years—an extremely high dropout or failure rate. No one has seriously questioned that statistic—a number, by the way, that the federal government does not publish, no doubt because it is embarrassingly low.
Also related is the fact that, in an attempt to minimize this problem, colleges have lowered standards, expecting students to read and write less while giving higher grades for lesser amounts of work. Surveys show that students spend on average less than 30 hours per week on academic work—less than they spend on recreation. As Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa show in their book Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses, critical thinking skills among college seniors on average are little more than among freshmen.
(7) As suggested to me a couple of days ago by a North Carolina judge, based on a case in his courtroom, with so many funds so readily available there is a temptation and opportunity for persons to acquire low interest student loans with the intention of dropping out of school quickly to use the proceeds for other purposes. (In the North Carolina student loan fraud case, it was to start up a t-shirt business.)
(8) Lazy or mediocre students can get greater subsidies than hard-working and industrious ones. Take Pell Grants. A student who works extra hard and graduates with top grades after three years will receive only half as much money as a student who flunks several courses and takes six years to finish or doesn’t obtain a degree at all. In other words, for recipients of federal aid there are disincentives to excel.
* * *
If the Law of Unintended Consequences ever applied, it is in federal student financial assistance. Programs created with the noblest of intentions have failed to serve either their customers or the nation well. In the 1950s and 1960s, before these programs were large, American higher education enjoyed a Golden Age. Enrollments were rising, lower-income student access was growing, and American leadership in higher education was becoming well established. In other words, the system flourished without these programs. Subsequently, massive growth in federal spending and involvement in higher education has proved counterproductive.
With the ratio of debt to GDP rising nationally, and the federal government continuing to spend more and more taxpayer money on higher education at an unsustainable long-term pace, a re-thinking of federal student financial aid policies is a good place to start in meeting America’s economic crisis.-
Richard Vedder
Professor of Economics
Ohio University
Now everyone who has taken the time to read this post is educated in the farce the Federal Government and the institutions of higher learn are running on the college student and the citizens of this great nation. In short the quality of education has dropped and the price has gone up.
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
United We Stand!
"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn."-Proverbs 29:2
A Fortnight For Freedom has been announced by the Conference of Catholic Bishops, driven by the recent assault on religious freedom perpetrated by our current administration. This demonstration of faith taking a stand for our right to keep government out of our churches and faith based charities will run from June 21st to July 4th. Last night at my church was a Holy Hour for Religious Freedom, and I have to tell you, the turn out was overwhelming. The attendance rivaled midnight mass on Christmas Eve. I might add this was as diverse a crowd as one could imagine. There were women, men, Asians, Hispanics, Afro-Americans, and representatives from every race. This is an issue that ignores racial, economic, and gender boundaries.
Christians understand that a people cannot survive under a republican constitution unless they remain virtuous and morally strong; united under the rule of law. To be "nudged" away from the principles of your religion will cause a push back, as our founders designed this great nation to allow it's citizens to exercise their faith free of government interference! This attempt to discredit Christianity by attacking a Catholic premise and forcing it's church run institutions to provide birth control is contrary to everything our forefathers fought and died for.
" There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. It's least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation."- James Madison (Elliot Debates, Vol. 3,p.330)
Now when we vote as united as we pray, this country will have leaders who remember what was fought and died for. The time spent in the voting booth is equally effective in this matter as time spent on our knees. God can only supply the votes needed to represent you if we actually vote. As Orrin rightly notes, "it's called the book of ACTS for a reason!"
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
A Fortnight For Freedom has been announced by the Conference of Catholic Bishops, driven by the recent assault on religious freedom perpetrated by our current administration. This demonstration of faith taking a stand for our right to keep government out of our churches and faith based charities will run from June 21st to July 4th. Last night at my church was a Holy Hour for Religious Freedom, and I have to tell you, the turn out was overwhelming. The attendance rivaled midnight mass on Christmas Eve. I might add this was as diverse a crowd as one could imagine. There were women, men, Asians, Hispanics, Afro-Americans, and representatives from every race. This is an issue that ignores racial, economic, and gender boundaries.
Christians understand that a people cannot survive under a republican constitution unless they remain virtuous and morally strong; united under the rule of law. To be "nudged" away from the principles of your religion will cause a push back, as our founders designed this great nation to allow it's citizens to exercise their faith free of government interference! This attempt to discredit Christianity by attacking a Catholic premise and forcing it's church run institutions to provide birth control is contrary to everything our forefathers fought and died for.
" There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. It's least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation."- James Madison (Elliot Debates, Vol. 3,p.330)
Now when we vote as united as we pray, this country will have leaders who remember what was fought and died for. The time spent in the voting booth is equally effective in this matter as time spent on our knees. God can only supply the votes needed to represent you if we actually vote. As Orrin rightly notes, "it's called the book of ACTS for a reason!"
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Monday, June 25, 2012
Showdown At High Noon!
This week is going to be a tough one on the Obama administration. It seems lately the President and his staff goes out of their way to create a boat load of problems for themselves. Each and everyday it becomes more apparent that our current leadership has forgotten the role of government; the idea that government is there to serve the people, not visa versa. As the conflict they create mounts, the people become confused. Some of the citizens are having difficulty with whom to believe. We'd all love to have faith in what those in Washington are moving forward with, but deep in our hearts we know their actions violate the principles our nation was founded upon.
This week the Catholics are beginning prayer vigils at each and everyone of their churches to promote unity in the effort to keep their freedom of religion. The hierarchy of the church will not come right out and suggest that their faithful vote this administration our of office, but if the prayers don't stop this madness created by the Obama administration you can rest assured it will activate the Catholics to vote their conscience. This will not be good for the democrats who keep pushing their agenda; as a combined force, Christians hold enough of a voting block to seal an election. May I also remind our readers this will have a deep impact on the recent ploy by this administration to subvert the Constitution and give special privileges to illegal immigrants. A great deal of that community is grounded in the Catholic faith. Let me assure you the right to life supercedes a green card, something the Catholic Church is well aware of. Their faith has provided for them a whole lot longer than any government has.
The Obama staff looks upon this as a battle of republican against the democrat philosophy, ignoring how deep faith runs in this country. They wrongly assume that since the secular message has been pounded home for decades this is their opportunity to pounce on religious freedom. It's a shame that the government has lost the morality this nation was grounded in and chooses to use division of the people as a tool to advance an agenda. I believe they would wear this as the crown achievement of their rule, imposing a law that advances the progressive agenda over religious freedom. This would mark a point in history where America move away from it's foundation of principles and into a society of secular progressivism.
It's come time when our nation asks itself which is stronger, faith in God our Creator or the rule of law designed by man? I'm betting on God!
God Bless
Capt. Bill
This week the Catholics are beginning prayer vigils at each and everyone of their churches to promote unity in the effort to keep their freedom of religion. The hierarchy of the church will not come right out and suggest that their faithful vote this administration our of office, but if the prayers don't stop this madness created by the Obama administration you can rest assured it will activate the Catholics to vote their conscience. This will not be good for the democrats who keep pushing their agenda; as a combined force, Christians hold enough of a voting block to seal an election. May I also remind our readers this will have a deep impact on the recent ploy by this administration to subvert the Constitution and give special privileges to illegal immigrants. A great deal of that community is grounded in the Catholic faith. Let me assure you the right to life supercedes a green card, something the Catholic Church is well aware of. Their faith has provided for them a whole lot longer than any government has.
The Obama staff looks upon this as a battle of republican against the democrat philosophy, ignoring how deep faith runs in this country. They wrongly assume that since the secular message has been pounded home for decades this is their opportunity to pounce on religious freedom. It's a shame that the government has lost the morality this nation was grounded in and chooses to use division of the people as a tool to advance an agenda. I believe they would wear this as the crown achievement of their rule, imposing a law that advances the progressive agenda over religious freedom. This would mark a point in history where America move away from it's foundation of principles and into a society of secular progressivism.
It's come time when our nation asks itself which is stronger, faith in God our Creator or the rule of law designed by man? I'm betting on God!
God Bless
Capt. Bill
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Self Deception?
Deception is such an interesting topic. We can be deceived by our senses and arrive at a distorted view of the truth as our bodies are our only link to the outside world, and within our bodies lie our senses. Let's take the analogy of a row boat. When the oar that you use to propel this vessel is lifted above the water our senses tell us it is straight. Place that same straight oar into water that you can see into and the refraction will lead you to believe the oar isn't straight. Without the prior knowledge from the oar being examined while elevated, one could be deceived into assuming the oar is bent. So how do we find certainty?
What a great question! The difference between the two scenarios listed above is our perception of the reality our senses have presented to us. To resolve the issue we have to have faith that the water didn't damage the oar. Our sense of sight is telling us otherwise, but we have to have faith that the laws we've been taught still hold true in this situation. We know an oar dipped in water cannot be bent by that simple act alone, despite what our eyes see. Things are not always as our sense perceive!
Apply this lesson to conflict resolution. The perception of one or both parties could be wrong, causing ill feeling for something that isn't what it seems. Perception is certainly part of reality, but what part do you allow it to play? Have you told yourself all the stories that could have created the conflict? When that driver cuts you off in traffic, is he an inconsiderate boob who is infringing on your driving space. Or perhaps he's a racing to the hospital after finding out his child was in an accident? Extract self from the equation and the world becomes a more peaceful place!
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
What a great question! The difference between the two scenarios listed above is our perception of the reality our senses have presented to us. To resolve the issue we have to have faith that the water didn't damage the oar. Our sense of sight is telling us otherwise, but we have to have faith that the laws we've been taught still hold true in this situation. We know an oar dipped in water cannot be bent by that simple act alone, despite what our eyes see. Things are not always as our sense perceive!
Apply this lesson to conflict resolution. The perception of one or both parties could be wrong, causing ill feeling for something that isn't what it seems. Perception is certainly part of reality, but what part do you allow it to play? Have you told yourself all the stories that could have created the conflict? When that driver cuts you off in traffic, is he an inconsiderate boob who is infringing on your driving space. Or perhaps he's a racing to the hospital after finding out his child was in an accident? Extract self from the equation and the world becomes a more peaceful place!
God Bless!
Capt. Bill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
